Europe has been dancing on the edge of a knife, flirting with notions of war with a battle hardened Russia over the conflict in Ukraine. As these tensions escalate, questions are being raised about the actual combat readiness and capabilities of countries that have relied on the US for their security for so long.
The primary division between the Trump Administration and NATO countries, the thing that started it all, was the initial refusal of so many of them to pay their fair share for defense. Currently, most NATO members budget around 2% of their GDP to defense under the NATO treaty. When asked to budget 5%, European governments became indignant, only agreeing to meet the target in a decade.
In an interesting recent admission from The Telegraph, Tom Tugendhat, a British MP and former security minister, argues that the UK simply lacks the independent military capabilities needed to pull off a rescue operation of one of their own airman similar to the recent US operation in Iran. He says that if one of their pilots needed to be saved, they would have to ask the US to do it.
“We do not have the platforms, the satellites, the reach or the mass. Our rescue plan, if the airman were British, would be to call the U.S.”
Tugendhat warned about the situation in Iran in March, saying he had questions as to why Prime Minister Keir Starmer failed to deploy appropriate air defense assets in the region to protect UK citizens and allies from missile and drone strikes. Starmer is facing mounting criticism for his delay in deploying the HMS Dragon to Cyprus, following an attack on UK base RAF Akrotiri.
Expressing his dismay at the lack of protection for British personnel, Tugendhat told GB News:
“My take is pretty simple – we may not have agreed with the initial decision to strike, that’s an American and Israeli decision…But I see absolutely no reason why we didn’t have assets in the region, why we didn’t have Type 45 destroyers in the region to protect our citizens and our allies. It’s baffling to me.”
Beyond their heavy reliance on the US and Europe’s lack of military spending, Europe is facing a crisis of public confidence. European military readiness has been exposed in the past few years as severely lacking, and a core problem these governments refuse to address is the fact that most young men simply don’t want to fight for them. In other words, in a voluntary system the governments and the countries in question need to hold similar values to the men they want to send into battle.
With far-left progressive elements holding power across Europe, this is simply not the case. So, their only option is to force a draft.
Several senior UK officials and MPs have publicly entertained or discussed the possibility of forced conscription (a military draft) as something that the government might implement in the event of a major war. UK military recruitment is far below requirements with the Army and Royal Navy consistently hitting only 60% of their personnel goals.
Dr. Mike Martin, a Liberal Democrat MP and former British Army officer, stated in March 2025 that if the UK became involved in a general war with Russia, “we’ll be conscripting the population – there’s no question about that.” He described it as something Britain “must be prepared” for, given the significant risk of wider conflict. Notions of an incoming draft have been a major topic in the British media for the past couple years.
The suspicion is that the establishment is acclimating the public to the idea over time, getting them ready to accept it as inevitable.
Germany is creating the framework for a draft right now. As of January 1, 2026, German men aged 17 to 45 must obtain “permission” from a Bundeswehr Career Center before traveling abroad for more than three months. They witnessed what happened in Ukraine at the start of the war with Russia; millions of young men fled the country to avoid conscription. Germany is establishing loss prevention, clearly planning for a near term clash with the Russians.
One strange narrative that has been circulating on social media is the argument among Europeans that the US “wasted” millions of dollars in military equipment in their successful mission to rescue “just one” wounded airman. The operation included special forces landing two MC-130s on a makeshift landing strip right under the nose of the IRGC and securing the area for the extraction of the stranded airman. The planes became stuck in the sand and had to be destroyed to prevent them falling into the hands of the Iranians.
It’s highly revealing that this sacrifice of equipment for the sake of saving a lost soldier is confusing to many Europeans. It shows that they can’t comprehend the idea of a government that would actually care enough to save them rather than throw them to the wolves. In other words, there is no loyalty on either side of the equation and Europe’s weaknesses go well beyond the political.